Beauty

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
User avatar
Jokingfish
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:12 pm

Beauty

Post by Jokingfish »

1.is beauty (generally) in any way of use?
2.are paintings useful?

Ty.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Can you be more specific?

What is beauty?

Useful for what purpose?
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Jokingfish
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:12 pm

Re: Beauty

Post by Jokingfish »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu Nov 03, 2022 4:22 am Can you be more specific?

What is beauty?

Useful for what purpose?
Well, id say beauty is something that we enjoy the way it looks to us, its formation (not sure, though, how would others answer?)

And on its use, how can it be useful psychologically, maybe to influence your mind, but is the influence useful if it comes from beauty? The problem is that beauty raises passion, which is not useful, right? And passion makes you not concentrated, disoriented.. Therefore beauty is a distraction, but is it true, can beauty be useful (psychologically)?
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Beauty

Post by Aemilius »

"The Buddha had his own take on beauty. He said; 'If someone is jealous, selfish or dishonest, they are unattractive despite their eloquence or good features. But the person who is purged of such things and is free from hatred, it is he or she who is really beautiful' (Dhp.262-3)." (Sravasti Dhammika)


"When the mind was thus concentrated... & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of the passing away & reappearance of beings. I saw — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings — who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech & mind, who reviled the Noble Ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings — who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile the Noble Ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views — with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus — by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human — I saw beings passing away & re-appearing, and I discerned how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma.

MN 19 Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking
translated from the Pali byThanissaro Bhikkhu
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Ayu
Global Moderator
Posts: 13258
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:25 am
Location: Europe

Re: Beauty

Post by Ayu »

Jokingfish wrote: Wed Nov 02, 2022 8:11 pm 1.is beauty (generally) in any way of use?
2.are paintings useful?

Ty.
I think, it depends on the viewer.
Their stance is responsible for the outcome.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Jokingfish wrote: Thu Nov 03, 2022 9:11 am
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Thu Nov 03, 2022 4:22 am Can you be more specific?

What is beauty?

Useful for what purpose?
Well, id say beauty is something that we enjoy the way it looks to us, its formation (not sure, though, how would others answer?)
it’s subjective. It’s a quality we give something. If we like the way something looks, we can say it is beautiful. But someone who doesn’t like how it looks might say it is ugly.
So, we can determine that a thing by itself is not either beautiful or not beautiful. It’s merely the opinion of the observer.
And on its use, how can it be useful psychologically, maybe to influence your mind, but is the influence useful if it comes from beauty?
sometimes yes, sometimes no. If something you are attracted to makes you feel better when you are sad, then it’s useful, like medicine.
The problem is that beauty raises passion, which is not useful, right? And passion makes you not concentrated, disoriented..
but the problem isn’t the object. It’s not the fault of a bouquet of flowers if you are distracted by them or not. The problem is one’s attachment.
If you understand that a bouquet of flowers is temporary, you can enjoy them, offer them, and when they turn brown you can put them in the compost.
But if a person thought, “I have always wanted a bouquet of flowers, and now that I have one, I shall always be happy” thinking the flowers are permanent, then they are going to be very disappointed in a few days.

This is precisely what beings do that causes the suffering that the Buddha talked about. People cling to objects thinking that those objects will bring lasting satisfaction. But of course, they don’t.

So, it’s not the object that is the problem,
and it’s not even liking or hating something that is really the problem.
The problem arises when we hold onto what we like and dislike as though it is permanent.
Therefore beauty is a distraction, but is it true, can beauty be useful (psychologically)?
Again, beauty is something we impute, or project. It’s what we imagine about something or someone else. There’s nothing wrong with that. But if one is constantly thinking “I like this, I don’t like that” then it’s definitely a distraction. This relates to what are called the “Three Poisons”, attachment, aversion, and indifference. They are called poisons because it is the habit of the mind to practice them in order to reinforce self-clinging.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Jokingfish
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:12 pm

Re: Beauty

Post by Jokingfish »

Bur can you enjoy anything without attachment?

Isn't beauty itself a passion, an attachment? (or admiring beauty is itself a passion, attachment)

Ty.
Last edited by Jokingfish on Thu Nov 03, 2022 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
master of puppets
Posts: 1649
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2020 9:52 pm

Re: Beauty

Post by master of puppets »

what's good is beautiful, don't know what others may take..
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Jokingfish wrote: Thu Nov 03, 2022 4:56 pm Bur can you enjoy anything without attachment?
Of course. A blue sky, the moon, laughter, the list is infinite. It’s when we experience things with attachment that we miss out.
Isn't beauty itself a passion, an attachment? (or admiring beauty is itself a passion, attachment)
It’s true that liking and disliking things are expressions of self-clinging. But you can have some attachment to something, and then later just let it go. Attachment is always temporary anyhow.

There is a line from the famous zen writing, “On Believing In Mind” that goes: “to set up what you like against what you dislike, this is the disease of the mind” which means that we need to examine how much we stay in the habit of grasping at preferences, becoming upset when things don’t go how we want them to, and so on:

http://home.primusonline.com.au/peony/faith_in_mind.htm

But depriving yourself is also a type of self-indulgence, if one is attached to some notion of absolute purity. Again, it doesn’t really matter if you find things attractive. I’ve always been a big fan of the Aston Martin DB5 (the famous 007 car) but I have no desire to own one. What matters is if one thinks that lasting happiness comes from external objects, rather than from the mind itself. External objects are all temporary, you can’t take them with you when you die. But the mind, awareness, is constant. This is why Buddhists meditate, and work with the mind itself. It’s not the object of desire that is the problem. It’s mistakenly thinking that attachment to temporary things will result in lasting satisfaction.
That’s what dukkha (“suffering”) is.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Jokingfish
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:12 pm

Re: Beauty

Post by Jokingfish »

It's hard to understand what is beauty according to Buddha, as i understand he sees beauty in everything (since all is formless, and one who knows this, cannot abandon such wisdom?), although if he would look at a painting, he would see egoism in it, but behind it he would see the universe (which is beautiful (formless)), also skills which he would acknowledge of the artwork. He also sees beauty in virtuous acts, so does that mean that virtue is more beautiful than vices, how come?
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Jokingfish wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 4:55 pm It's hard to understand what is beauty according to Buddha, as i understand he sees beauty in everything (since all is formless, and one who knows this, cannot abandon such wisdom?), although if he would look at a painting, he would see egoism in it, but behind it he would see the universe (which is beautiful (formless)), also skills which he would acknowledge of the artwork. He also sees beauty in virtuous acts, so does that mean that virtue is more beautiful than vices, how come?
You are using the terms “beauty” and “beautiful” to suggest a variety of concepts. A Buddha doesn’t “see beauty” in things


Phenomena lack any intrinsic reality. Whether we perceive something as beautiful or ugly doesn’t matter. It’s just a projection of our minds that give things such distinctions. Buddhas don’t do that.

Thus, they can be useful or not useful.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
anagarika
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:45 am

Re: Beauty

Post by anagarika »

Jokingfish wrote: Wed Nov 02, 2022 8:11 pm 1.is beauty (generally) in any way of use?
2.are paintings useful?

Ty.
Good questions that take some sorting out. There is a certain tendency among many Buddhist (especially in the Theravada tradition) to naively dismiss the concept of beauty as sense desire, clinging and pure delusion. At least in my opinion, this is very short sighted and indeed naive.

Ad 1): Beauty can mean a lot of things for different people so maybe you should define it in the first place. Generally speaking, beatuiful things tend to be well-structured, symmetric, even geometric, and they also tend to have unifying effect on our attention (the mind tends to absorb into them). These attributes can be found in the realm of arts, but also physical appearance or even in certain types of behaviour or thinking.

That being said, beauty is potentially of great use, and that´s true even for meditative development (I´ll get to this later). The problematic aspect you seem to be implying is there as well, of course. It can be problematic for someone aspiring to developing the higher mind to absorb for instance into the taste of delicious food or into good-looking people. I don´t think the problem is that these things are beautiful - the problem is that it´s a low quality beauty. The Buddha does not deny there are "forms pleasing to the eye etc.", and he even doesn´t necessarily encourage EVERYONE to abandon them, but he tries to point us in the direction of the high quality beauty.

In later commentarial traditions, they have these two types of releases: Release on the unattractive (asubha), and release on the beautiful (subha). The "sign of the beautiful" (subha nimitta) can be acquired in meditation on objects such as the brahmaviharas or kasinas. In fact, the perception of the beautiful is the key to success with colour kasinas - if you go deep enough, it´s the splendour of the mental image of the kasina that you absorb into. You basically create a feedback loop - there is a perception of beautiful visual object, this creates the pleasant feeling, this stimulates your interest, interest solidifies attention and the attention stays on the original perception, and so on and on.

Ad 2): Some of them surely can be. I always loved paintings by Hieronymus Bosch - they are a perfect representation of the samsaric jungle and I´m sure the Buddha would appreciate many of them as well.
Vasana
Posts: 2231
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Beauty

Post by Vasana »

Beauty can be a cause for joy which can be conducive for practice.

Do you think the Buddha ever once appreciated the beauty of a Lotus flower or a sunrise or a sun-set? The key difference is when it becomes an attachment and clinging. All sensory appearances of something pleasing or displeasing are only ever temporary within our conscious experiences of them.

A picture of a Buddha, a well-made painting of deity, a rendition of a mantra sung in a beautiful voice are all examples of subjective beauty acting as a potential support for your practice. Attachment to beauty on the other hand, can be an obstacle.

We're hard-wired biologically and neurologically to find some things attractive and some things unattractive. It's what you do (or do not do) and the concepts you hold around those sensory appearance that makes the difference.

We don't need to aspire to be as a senseless block of wood in light of beauty, we just have to to habitualise ourselves in not grasping on to it with attachment, which only leads to dissasisfaction when it inevitably leaves our sensory experience.
'When thoughts arise, recognise them clearly as your teacher'— Gampopa
'When alone, examine your mind, when among others, examine your speech'.— Atisha
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

anagarika wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 5:29 pm
Generally speaking, beatuiful things tend to be well-structured, symmetric, even geometric, and they also tend to have unifying effect on our attention (the mind tends to absorb into them). These attributes can be found in the realm of arts, but also physical appearance or even in certain types of behaviour or thinking.
ngle and I´m sure the Buddha would appreciate many of them as well.
You have it backwards.
People define structured, symmetric, geometric, etc things as “beautiful”. But people also define asymmetrical design as beautiful.

Beauty is an abstract concept.

It is a mistake to start with an abstract word and then try to fill in the blanks in an effort to figure out what the word means.

The Diamond Sutra is really a lot about this.

Donss as no image search on
“enkubutsu enku carved buddhas” and decide if they fit any definition of “beauty”


You can say that something > possesses beauty
But you can’t say
Beauty is defined by > something.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Beauty

Post by Aemilius »

Bhante Dhammika has several times written about beauty in Buddhism:

"In numerous places throughout the scriptures the Buddha is described as having a golden-coloured skin (kancanasannibhattaca), exceptionally smooth skin (sukhumacchavi) and clear and radiant faculties (vippasannani indriyani, A.I,181; D.III,143; Sn.551). This outer beauty was a direct result of his inner transformation. The experience of enlightenment had dissolved all greed, hatred and perplexity creating space for the unrestricted expression of love, kindness, detachment and clarity. This in turn gave the Buddha a beautiful complexion and countenance that lasted even into his old age.
A sure sign of progress in meditation is that the face develops a more noticeably calm and pleasant demeanour (bhadramukha). Those who are able to spend longer periods in meditation and whose practice is fruitful, are sometimes reported as having radiant complexions. This is particularly true for those doing loving-kindness meditation or who have attained any of the four jhanas (S.III,236; V,301).

Popular wisdom says that a person's heart is written on their face and there is an element of truth in this saying. Fear or worry can make the eyes to sink into their sockets, the cheeks droop and the skin become pale. An explosive temper can make the face red and in time cause the capillaries to become visible (dhamanisanthtagatta) so that the skin has a blotchy appearance. A persistently angry, critical or haughty outlook can give the skin a dark hue and make the ends of the mouth turn down into a sneer.

The Buddha said that physical attractiveness is a blessing (A.III,47) and who could argue with him. First impressions are important and being good-looking always creates a favourable impression. The Buddha saw a relationship between physical beauty and goodness, saying that one of the vipakas of virtue is good-looks (M.III,204). I must say, I have serious doubts about this but there it is! The five types of human beauty are beautiful complexion, beautiful hair, beautiful muscle structure, beautiful teeth and the beauty of youth (Ja.I,394). In the Buddha’s world a complexion which was “not too dark and not too fair” was considered the most desirable (M.I,88).

The Buddha had his own take on beauty. He said; 'If someone is jealous, selfish or dishonest, they are unattractive despite their eloquence or good features. But the person who is purged of such things and is free from hatred, it is he or she who is really beautiful' (Dhp.262-3).

The Jatakas says of a loving friend; “A ordinary friend will go seven steps for you, a loving friend (sahaya) will go twelve. If he does so for a fortnight or a month he is family, more than that and he is your second self.” What is here translated as ‘second self’ is attasamo which literally means ‘the same as oneself’, Ja.I,365). These virtues imply kindness, unstinting generosity, loyalty, sympathetic joy and absolute openness and trust. One will, the Buddha said; “cherish and nurture such a friend as a mother does the child of her own breast” (D.III,188).

When two people’s loving friendship includes a significant spiritual element they become what the Buddha called kalyana mitta and their relationship is called kalyana mittata. A kalyana mitta is the ideal friend and kalyana mittata is the supreme human relationship. Kalyana literally means ‘beautiful’ or ‘lovely’ although the Buddha was not referring to physical attractiveness but inner beauty, the beauty of integrity, kind-heartedness, virtue and love of the Dhamma."

more in https://sdhammika.blogspot.com/search?q=beauty+
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Aemilius wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:45 am Bhante Dhammika has several times written about beauty in Buddhism:

"In numerous places throughout the scriptures the Buddha is described as having a golden-coloured skin (kancanasannibhattaca), exceptionally smooth skin (sukhumacchavi) and clear and radiant faculties (vippasannani indriyani, A.I,181; D.III,143; Sn.551). This outer beauty was a direct result of his inner transformation. The experience of enlightenment had dissolved all greed, hatred and perplexity creating space for the unrestricted expression of love, kindness, detachment and clarity. This in turn gave the Buddha a beautiful complexion and countenance that lasted even into his old age.
A sure sign of progress in meditation is that the face develops a more noticeably calm and pleasant demeanour (bhadramukha). Those who are able to spend longer periods in meditation and whose practice is fruitful, are sometimes reported as having radiant complexions. This is particularly true for those doing loving-kindness meditation or who have attained any of the four jhanas (S.III,236; V,301).

Popular wisdom says that a person's heart is written on their face and there is an element of truth in this saying. Fear or worry can make the eyes to sink into their sockets, the cheeks droop and the skin become pale. An explosive temper can make the face red and in time cause the capillaries to become visible (dhamanisanthtagatta) so that the skin has a blotchy appearance. A persistently angry, critical or haughty outlook can give the skin a dark hue and make the ends of the mouth turn down into a sneer.

The Buddha said that physical attractiveness is a blessing (A.III,47) and who could argue with him. First impressions are important and being good-looking always creates a favourable impression. The Buddha saw a relationship between physical beauty and goodness, saying that one of the vipakas of virtue is good-looks (M.III,204). I must say, I have serious doubts about this but there it is! The five types of human beauty are beautiful complexion, beautiful hair, beautiful muscle structure, beautiful teeth and the beauty of youth (Ja.I,394). In the Buddha’s world a complexion which was “not too dark and not too fair” was considered the most desirable (M.I,88).

The Buddha had his own take on beauty. He said; 'If someone is jealous, selfish or dishonest, they are unattractive despite their eloquence or good features. But the person who is purged of such things and is free from hatred, it is he or she who is really beautiful' (Dhp.262-3).

The Jatakas says of a loving friend; “A ordinary friend will go seven steps for you, a loving friend (sahaya) will go twelve. If he does so for a fortnight or a month he is family, more than that and he is your second self.” What is here translated as ‘second self’ is attasamo which literally means ‘the same as oneself’, Ja.I,365). These virtues imply kindness, unstinting generosity, loyalty, sympathetic joy and absolute openness and trust. One will, the Buddha said; “cherish and nurture such a friend as a mother does the child of her own breast” (D.III,188).

When two people’s loving friendship includes a significant spiritual element they become what the Buddha called kalyana mitta and their relationship is called kalyana mittata. A kalyana mitta is the ideal friend and kalyana mittata is the supreme human relationship. Kalyana literally means ‘beautiful’ or ‘lovely’ although the Buddha was not referring to physical attractiveness but inner beauty, the beauty of integrity, kind-heartedness, virtue and love of the Dhamma."

more in https://sdhammika.blogspot.com/search?q=beauty+
None of these quotes establish “beauty” as an objective reality.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
anagarika
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:45 am

Re: Beauty

Post by anagarika »

Aemilius wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:45 am ...
:good:

PadmaVonSamba wrote:
But you can’t say
Beauty is defined by > something.
Well, I think that´s exactly what the Buddha was saying - that there are things that are inherently beautiful and that they are beatiful due to certain objectively existing attributes. One could argue that their beauty might not be perceived by those of insufficient capabilities, though. If you take a dog to an art gallery, all he can perceive might be the (for him) irritating smell of oil paintings. He won´t see the beauty in the structures because he has not appropriate capabilities.

It might be that if you are a hardcore madhyamika, you will insist that the notions of beauty and ugliness are ultimately mere concepts. However, the Buddha never spoke in this relativistic tone about matters related to Dhamma (and some other phenomena). What we read in the suttas is that certain mind states, such as brahmaviharas, are inherently beautiful, and others, such as anger, are inherently not beautiful.


That being said, I don´t deny there are many grey zones. The carved statues you suggested might, of course, be perceived in different ways by different people. The question of beauty in arts is very complex and hard to settle in a short forum post.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4604
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Beauty

Post by Aemilius »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 3:00 pm
Aemilius wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 11:45 am Bhante Dhammika has several times written about beauty in Buddhism:

"In numerous places throughout the scriptures the Buddha is described as having a golden-coloured skin (kancanasannibhattaca), exceptionally smooth skin (sukhumacchavi) and clear and radiant faculties (vippasannani indriyani, A.I,181; D.III,143; Sn.551). This outer beauty was a direct result of his inner transformation. The experience of enlightenment had dissolved all greed, hatred and perplexity creating space for the unrestricted expression of love, kindness, detachment and clarity. This in turn gave the Buddha a beautiful complexion and countenance that lasted even into his old age.
A sure sign of progress in meditation is that the face develops a more noticeably calm and pleasant demeanour (bhadramukha). Those who are able to spend longer periods in meditation and whose practice is fruitful, are sometimes reported as having radiant complexions. This is particularly true for those doing loving-kindness meditation or who have attained any of the four jhanas (S.III,236; V,301).

Popular wisdom says that a person's heart is written on their face and there is an element of truth in this saying. Fear or worry can make the eyes to sink into their sockets, the cheeks droop and the skin become pale. An explosive temper can make the face red and in time cause the capillaries to become visible (dhamanisanthtagatta) so that the skin has a blotchy appearance. A persistently angry, critical or haughty outlook can give the skin a dark hue and make the ends of the mouth turn down into a sneer.

The Buddha said that physical attractiveness is a blessing (A.III,47) and who could argue with him. First impressions are important and being good-looking always creates a favourable impression. The Buddha saw a relationship between physical beauty and goodness, saying that one of the vipakas of virtue is good-looks (M.III,204). I must say, I have serious doubts about this but there it is! The five types of human beauty are beautiful complexion, beautiful hair, beautiful muscle structure, beautiful teeth and the beauty of youth (Ja.I,394). In the Buddha’s world a complexion which was “not too dark and not too fair” was considered the most desirable (M.I,88).

The Buddha had his own take on beauty. He said; 'If someone is jealous, selfish or dishonest, they are unattractive despite their eloquence or good features. But the person who is purged of such things and is free from hatred, it is he or she who is really beautiful' (Dhp.262-3).

The Jatakas says of a loving friend; “A ordinary friend will go seven steps for you, a loving friend (sahaya) will go twelve. If he does so for a fortnight or a month he is family, more than that and he is your second self.” What is here translated as ‘second self’ is attasamo which literally means ‘the same as oneself’, Ja.I,365). These virtues imply kindness, unstinting generosity, loyalty, sympathetic joy and absolute openness and trust. One will, the Buddha said; “cherish and nurture such a friend as a mother does the child of her own breast” (D.III,188).

When two people’s loving friendship includes a significant spiritual element they become what the Buddha called kalyana mitta and their relationship is called kalyana mittata. A kalyana mitta is the ideal friend and kalyana mittata is the supreme human relationship. Kalyana literally means ‘beautiful’ or ‘lovely’ although the Buddha was not referring to physical attractiveness but inner beauty, the beauty of integrity, kind-heartedness, virtue and love of the Dhamma."

more in https://sdhammika.blogspot.com/search?q=beauty+
None of these quotes establish “beauty” as an objective reality.
There is no "objective" reality. You have to develop your inner senses, your sensitivity, and your mind, to be able to perceive beauty. Still beauty exists, although it is difficult to define it. According to Buddhist teachings, the Kamaloka deva-realms are more beautiful than the human realm. And the dhyana realms are more beautiful than the kamaloka realms. But it is your mind that must be on the level of kamaloka realms, dhyana realms or the pure realms.

Some times people can be taken to, or they can attain for a moment or for a limited time, the level of deva-realms or the level of the pure lands of various Buddhas. After these experiences of extraordinary beauty and of extraordinary colour and form, everything in this human world is just grey, there are no colours here at all. Also the forms in the higher realms are unthinkable. This is told for example in the Nanda sutta of the Pali texts. And in the Pureland Buddhist literature.

from Nanda sutta:
'
"Then, taking Ven. Nanda by the arm — as a strong man might flex his extended arm or extend his flexed arm — the Blessed One disappeared from Jeta's Grove and reappeared among the devas of the heaven of the Thirty-three [Tāvatiṃsa]. Now on that occasion about 500 dove-footed nymphs had come to wait upon Sakka, the ruler of the devas. The Blessed One said to Ven. Nanda, "Nanda, do you see these 500 dove-footed nymphs?"

"Yes, lord."

"What do you think, Nanda? Which is lovelier, better looking, more charming: the Sakyan girl, the envy of the countryside, or these 500 dove-footed nymphs?"

"Lord, compared to these 500 dove-footed nymphs, the Sakyan girl, the envy of the countryside, is like a cauterized monkey with its ears & nose cut off. She doesn't count. She's not even a small fraction. There's no comparison. The 500 dove-footed nymphs are lovelier, better looking, more charming."

Nanda Sutta: About Nanda
translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu © 2012
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9443
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Beauty

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

anagarika wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 4:55 pm Well, I think that´s exactly what the Buddha was saying - that there are things that are inherently beautiful and that they are beatiful due to certain objectively existing attributes. One could argue that their beauty might not be perceived by those of insufficient capabilities, though. If you take a dog to an art gallery, all he can perceive might be the (for him) irritating smell of oil paintings.
no, because you’d still be arguing that beauty is objective. That argument is already based on the premise that beauty is objective rather than subjective. I personally find linseed oil (the scent of oil paintings) to be a wonderful scent.

Don’t you find the smell of poop beautiful? Dogs do. They often like to roll in it. They are attracted to each other smelling each other’s butts. So if you say that paintings are inherently beautiful but dogs can’t perceive that, then you’d have to say that poop is inherently fragrant but we can’t perceive it… which means that the quality of beauty is subjective, not objective. It rests in the mind of the perceiver.

Actually, this should be totally obvious to anyone who has a different opinion about any flavor, any type of art, etc.

If beauty cannot be perceived due to lack of capabilities, meaning that some beings see it and others don’t, then by definition, it doesn’t exist except subjectively.

Furthermore, the visual qualities of any object cannot be inherent in that object because they rely completely on that object reflecting light. If you put a painting inside an absolutely dark room, the image ceases to exist. The physical and chemical elements of which the object is made may be there, but there is no color, no line, no shapes until light bounces off of it and goes into our retinas. Images do not exist without light.

Since images rely on light, and visual beauty relies on seeing, then beauty cannot be inherently existent within an object.
Last edited by PadmaVonSamba on Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
anagarika
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2021 10:45 am

Re: Beauty

Post by anagarika »

Aemilius wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 7:03 pm
There is no "objective" reality. You have to develop your inner senses, your sensitivity, and your mind, to be able to perceive beauty. Still beauty exists, although it is difficult to define it. According to Buddhist teachings, the Kamaloka deva-realms are more beautiful than the human realm. And the dhyana realms are more beautiful than the kamaloka realms. But it is your mind that must be on the level of kamaloka realms, dhyana realms or the pure realms.
Exquisitely :good:
Post Reply

Return to “Lounge”